# Before approving $4.1B in new gas plants, Louisiana regulators should compare all options

*Published:* 2026-08-06
*Author:* Kahlida Lloyd

Louisiana families and businesses deserve an electric system that is reliable, affordable and prepared for a rapidly changing future. They also deserve confidence that when utilities ask customers to pay billions of dollars for new power plants, those investments truly represent the best available option.

That is the central issue before the Louisiana Public Service Commission as it considers Entergy Louisiana’s [request to build](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/DocketDetails?docketId=32689) two new gas-fired power plants, Waterford 6 and Westlake, at an estimated cost of $4.1 billion. If approved, the projects could add nearly $15 a month to the average residential customer’s electric bill, with those costs ultimately recovered through customer rates.

In [testimony](https://www.edf.org/media/entergys-cottonwood-pause-reinforces-need-rigorous-review-approving-proposed-41-billion) filed on behalf of Environmental Defense Fund with the Louisiana Public Service Commission, energy planning expert Dr. Maria Roumpani concludes that Entergy has not demonstrated these plants are the lowest-cost, lowest-risk option for customers and that regulators should require a more rigorous evaluation before committing ratepayers to decades of costs.

**Why this matters**

Louisiana is experiencing one of the [fastest periods](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/grid-wars-data-centers-challenge-gulf-coasts-industrial-power-1d3be/) of projected electricity demand growth in its history, driven by major industrial development. Meeting that demand will require significant investment, but regulators must ensure utilities invest in resources that are the lowest-cost, lowest-risk option and continue to deliver value for customers if conditions change, including load forecasts, commodity prices or policy constraints. The Commission must also evaluate these proposed plants in the context of Louisiana’s broader electricity system and the additional infrastructure and generation being planned to support future industrial growth, including data centers.

No one disputes that Louisiana needs reliable electricity to support a growing economy. The question is whether building two large gas plants now is the smartest way to deliver it. Once customers begin paying for these facilities, they could be responsible for their costs for decades, making today’s decisions critical for the future of customer bills, fuel reliance and grid reliability.

**Main reasons for concern**

**First, Entergy has not demonstrated that Louisiana needs two new gas plants of this size.** The testimony finds that the company’s demand forecasts rely heavily on projected large industrial customers without adequately accounting for uncertainty, changing customer plans or the possibility that some projects never materialize. For example, if one or more of the largest proposed industrial projects are delayed, reduced in scope or never built, one of the proposed generators may no longer be needed, yet customers could still be on the hook for its costs. The company also has not committed to retirement dates for aging power plants or completed analyses showing these new facilities are the best replacement option.

**Second, Entergy did not adequately evaluate whether more incremental, cost-effective solutions could meet Louisiana’s growing electricity needs.** Rather than asking which combination of resources would best meet future demand, Entergy largely compared different gas plant proposals with one another. That means alternatives like energy efficiency, demand response, solar power, battery storage, transmission upgrades and customer-owned energy resources were never fully evaluated alongside the new proposed fossil fuel plants.

**Third, the economic case is weaker than it appears.** Entergy’s economic analysis relies on assumptions that have not been sufficiently supported. The testimony finds that the projected benefits depend on assumptions about costs and future demand that may not hold. A modest increase in project costs or a likely shortfall in projected load growth could erase the projected savings altogether, leaving customers to bear the costs without receiving the promised benefits.

**Finally, the proposal shifts substantial risk onto customers.** If construction costs increase, fuel prices rise, or anticipated industrial demand fails to materialize, Louisiana ratepayers could remain responsible for paying for infrastructure they may not need. They would also face decades of exposure to natural gas price volatility because fuel costs are passed directly through on electric bills. Louisianans have already seen what those price swings can mean. Between October 2025 and February 2026, higher natural gas prices added about $16 to the monthly bill of a household using 1,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity.

**A smarter path to affordable growth**

As Louisiana plans for future electricity demand, EDF recommends evaluating more incremental, cost-effective solutions before committing customers to major new gas generation. That broader portfolio includes energy efficiency, demand response, customer-owned resources like rooftop solar and battery storage, transmission improvements, grid-enhancing technologies, and incremental utility-scale solar and battery storage. Together, these resources can improve reliability, meet growing demand and reduce the need for costly new power plants.

Together, these resources can improve reliability, meet growing demand and reduce the need for costly, customer-funded gas investments. With important regional transmission studies already underway, it’s worth waiting for more information and evaluating additional technologies that could improve reliability while reducing costs before committing customers to major new generating facilities.

**What we recommend**

EDF recommends that the Commission deny certification of both plants at this time. Before reconsidering the proposal, the Commission should require Entergy to:

- Conduct a competitive all-source procurement.
- Better document and validate future electricity demand.
- Commit to retirement plans for existing generating units.
- Demonstrate stronger use of energy efficiency and demand response through the Commission’s [Proactive Utility Energy Needs](https://blogs.edf.org/energyexchange/2026/07/23/louisiana-has-a-chance-to-get-ahead-of-rising-electricity-demand/) process.
- Evaluate transmission solutions and grid-enhancing technologies.
- Analyze how customers would be affected if projected industrial growth does not occur.
- Cap recoverable construction costs if any project ultimately moves forward.

**Building the right grid for Louisianans**

Louisiana’s economy is changing rapidly, and the electric grid must evolve with it. But planning for growth should not mean assuming that expensive investments automatically deliver better outcomes. Before asking customers to pay billions of dollars for new infrastructure, regulators should require utilities to demonstrate that those investments are the most cost-effective way to meet the state’s growing energy needs.

The Commission has an opportunity to require utilities to compare competing solutions, evaluate customer risks and pursue the most cost-effective path forward. With billions of customer dollars at stake, regulators should insist on a thorough evaluation of all viable alternatives before asking Louisianans to pay for decades to come.